Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Yes, it will only be available to families with children. And, apart from the restriction on the income one could attribute to the spouse, there will be another restriction on how much one could save from income splitting - no more than $2000. Still, it's better than nothing:

Income splitting would help almost half of Canadian families with children under 18. If it were adopted federally and provincially, typical middle-class families getting by on a single income would see substantive tax relief. For example:

A graphic designer in British Columbia with a salary of $49,920 would save 27% on taxes (down from $5,027 to $3,658)
An electrician in Ontario earning $56,150 would save 35% on taxes
A registered nurse in New Brunswick earning $72,800 would save 28% on taxes
Income splitting has been depicted as a tax break for specially chosen Canadians. However, currently certain Canadian families are unjustly disadvantaged by our tax code. Income splitting would eliminate this injustice, treating all families equally.

The disadvantage is clear since two families with matching incomes are taxed differently based on how their incomes are earned. Families that sacrifice workforce pay in order to address caretaking needs are penalized through higher taxes.

This long-standing injustice in our tax code is both unfair and unacceptable to Canadians. Recent polling confirms that Canadians, regardless of political preference, support income splitting. Opponents of the policy are a vocal minority.

The opposition parties keep blasting the Conservatives for what they claim is a "tax break for the rich"; the Liberals (primarily - Ralph Goodale and Justin Trudeay) claimed that a family would have to make as much as $160,000 to fully benefit from income splitting. Let's see if it's really so. Let's calculate together how much does one have to make to take full advantage of the $2000 tax break.

Our first tax bracket is 15%. The next one is 22%. By attributing part of his income to a spouse, one would save 7 cents on the dollar. How much income does one have to attribute to hit the $2000 ceiling? 2000/0.07=$28,571.42. Combined with the $43,953 threshold where the 22% rate kicks in, that amounts to mere $72,525. That's nowhere near $160,000 (not even half that much). And only hardcore lefties could argue that a family making $72,500 is somehow "rich".

Income splitting is there to provide middle income families with much needed tax relief. Hopefully, as the time comes for the next Federal election, all these families make the right chose and don't trade the long-awaited tax break for a legalized marijuana.

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

Danielle Smith blames the Social Conservatives for helping to push her to the PCs. I guess she was expecting the party's Social Conservative wing to just leave and slam the door behind them - after all she had done to marginalize them (among with the climate skeptics and the free speechers) in this couple of years between her election loss and her defection to the governing PCs.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

New Brunswick Right to Life says the legal basis being advanced for the provincial government’s new abortion policy is nothing but pro-choice propaganda.

Commenting on the rationale some MLAs used yesterday in the Legislature, executive director Peter Ryan said, “We heard the statement ‘a woman’s right to choose is the law’ ad nauseam,” he said. “That statement is pure propaganda. The Supreme Court has created no such right. To hang your hat on such hogwash is shameful. The assertion made would be laughable except its consequence will prove fatal for many children in this province,” he said.

Ryan said yesterday will go down as a dark day in New Brunswick history. He referred to the Legislative Assembly’s refusal to debate a historic change in provincial abortion policy. His association maintains the practical effect of the planned changes is tax-funded abortion on demand, “something not required by law, and contrary to good medicine, the will of New Brunwickers, and the tenets of morality.”

“Members had a window today to consider the plight of thousands of preborn children and vulnerable women whose lives will be put at risk by the pending removal of abortion restrictions January 1,” said executive director Peter Ryan. “Most chose to slam that window shut. To use a biblical term, they hardened their hearts. Innocent children will die as a result.”

Special thanks to the People's Alliance voters. It's their vote splitting that delivered all 4 tossup ridings to the Liberals. David Alward and the PCs weren't good enough for them - they got Brian Gallant and his radicalized Liberals. And so are all of us here in New Brunswick.

Thursday, July 31, 2014

The Constitution Act (1867) lays out the division of powers between federal and provincial governments.

Section 92 (16) confers on provincial legislatures the power to make laws in relation to “all matters of merely local or private nature in the province.” Similarly, paragraph 7 of that same section authorizes provinces to make laws in relation to “the establishment, maintenance, and management of hospitals, charities, etc.” This specifically authorizes the provinces to establish and regulate hospitals, and to regulate hospital-based health care services.

There is a lot of room for provincial legislatures to step up. For example, there are no laws stipulating that women seeking an abortion need to be properly informed on the physical and psychological risks accompanying abortion. Similarly, no health jurisdiction in our country has parental consent for abortion legislation.

A few weeks ago, my 16-year-old daughter was asked to come in for a night shift at the retail outlet she works at. In order for her to do that, my wife and I had to give our written consent. We didn’t have a problem with this — it provided a measure of respect for and deference to our parental responsibilities. In contrast, if our daughter found herself in an unplanned pregnancy, she could quite easily be pressured to think abortion was the only solution for her and to abort her pre-born child without our knowledge.
...
Note the stark contrast in how we treat our daughters when it comes to tattooing and employment standards compared to the current legal vacuum regarding abortion — a decision for which there is also permanent ramifications.

Yes, they argued that they shouldn't be required to have a sterile operating room to do abortions, they claimed that these requirements were excessive and that, if enforced, they could drive abortion facilities out of business. Quebec did back down from these requirements back in 2009. But a government that's truly concerned about human life can do just that - drive these butchers out of business.

Tuesday, June 3, 2014

VATICAN CITY (RNS) Pope Francis on Monday (June 2) warned married couples against substituting cats and dogs for children — a move that he said leads to the “bitterness of loneliness” in old age.
...
“You can go explore the world, go on holiday, you can have a villa in the countryside, you can be carefree,” the pope said.

“It might be better — more comfortable — to have a dog, two cats, and the love goes to the two cats and the dog. Is this true or not? Have you seen it?

“Then, in the end this marriage comes to old age in solitude, with the bitterness of loneliness.“

There were plenty of MLAs present; some say - as many as 23 of them - which is too, a record number. Here are 2 speeches: By Bill Fraser, a Liberal MLA for Miramichi-Bay du Vin and by Jody Carr, a PC MLA for Oromocto.

P.S. Please excuse the blurry and shaky picture. When the MLAs began to speak, camera men from the mainstream media rushed to the scene, so we had quite a hard time not to bump into one another.

Finally, here are the speeches by Marion Fogan from the Catholic Women's League and Armand LeBlanc from the Knights of Columbus:

Sunday, April 27, 2014

First, the likely true head of the “take New Brunswick down” campaign revealed herself. The Telegraph-Journal here published an opinion piece entitled “On abortion, New Brunswick must change” by one Vicky Saporta. She is identified as “the president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation of Canada.” Coincidentally, she is president and CEO of the National Abortion Federation of the U.S.

Shortly after the April 10 news report that the Morgentaler Clinic here would close, I circulated a memo to the media here, expressing my strong suspicion that not only was the “closing” news a ploy, but that a propaganda campaign against NB policy was being orchestrated from Washington DC – headquarters of the NAF. My suspicions are now greatly strengthened.

We are dealing above all with Ms. Saporta and the money /power of the North American abortion industry. They have targeted New Brunswick for take-down. It is highly likely that Ms. Saporta is running the show.

And quite a show it is!! There is a tremendous barrage of pro-abortion propaganda in the media here the last two weeks. And politicians have been getting in line to dance to the tune. Today (another reason it’s a bad day), the Liberal Party of New Brunswick – the same party that under Premiers Frank McKenna and Shawn Graham strongly opposed Morgentaler – approved at its policy convention a resolution in favor of “better abortion access.” We all know that’s only code language for killing babies on demand. Current Liberal leader Brian Gallant seems to be falling all over himself currying favor with the pro-abortion crowd. There is a real danger he will be Premier of New Brunswick by September. What happens to NB’s policy on abortion then?

For me it is reminiscent of the media hoopla in Ireland following the death of that young pregnant woman from India. The media reported that as death from an abortion denied, and a huge media campaign ensued. The campaign was based on a lie- she did not die from an abortion denied. But hysteria was whipped up, rallies were held, and politicians caved, with the result Ireland changed its law in favor of abortion, establishing a legal precedent that will tend relentlessly toward abortion on demand.

Is the Morgentaler establishment here really going to close? In all likelihood, that too is a lie, calculated (very cleverly) to arouse hysteria and send shock waves leading to everything people like Vicky Saporta really want – full abortion on demand, fully funded, in both hospitals and private clinics. That’s the game. That’s the dice they’ve rolled in announcing the clinic closing.

At this point the tide of “public opinion” is running strongly in their favor. They are winning. I say “public opinion” meaning not what New Brunswickers really think – which no doubt has not changed that dramatically in a couple weeks: most people oppose abortion on demand, and funding the Morg. Clinic. I mean perceived public opinion, that mood that is in the air as shaped largely by the chattering classes of the media and academia.

Now we can all pooh-pooh that kind of opinion as being a big fat pile of the devil’s manure. But surely we’ve been paying attention to the history of abortion the last few decades. We should know the power of evil and deception is not to be sneezed at. It can take a country down, institutionally – as it has Canada. It can take a province down – as it has almost everywhere. It can take New Brunswick down. And if we go down, it will right away be on PEI’s doorstep.

I hope you know me enough to know: I am not throwing in the white flag! I am just soberly saying where things stand. We are up against quite a tidal wave, and It’s not diminishing.

In the last two weeks we’ve seen the university community at both St. Thomas U. (petition in favor of clinic funding) and University of New Brunswick (op-ed from many UNB professors) chime in for abortion. We’ve had editorials in three daily papers for abortion. The Fredericton Daily Gleaner has been heavily slanted in news coverage. We’ve had the Acadian daily publish numerous pro-abortion commentaries, and not a thing pro-life. CBC has been relentlessly one-sided, including in its Maritime-wide coverage. The Telegraph-Journal has been somewhat balanced, but published a horrible op-ed by Heather Mallick (similar to Ms. Saporta’s). We’ve had the leaders of the Liberal, NDP and Green Party come out for abortion. NDP members federally have gotten involved. A pro-abortion rally was held at the Legislature last week. Today rallies were held in Ottawa and Montreal (while they seemed not amount to much in numbers, that did not stop CBC Newsworld from reporting “Canadians rally for abortion rights”). We fully expect Ms. Saporta has other tricks up her sleeve.

We are not silent or inactive by any means. We have had some commentary published, including my own. Various letters to the editor have been good (but nowhere near as many as we need). We have mobilized our own petition. We have gotten hundreds of email sent in to the government. Our supporters have been praying hard. A letter of support from 100+ Canadians was sent to our government. We are planning our biggest ever March for Life soon. We are hearing from numerous pro-lifers here we’ve never heard from before. And so on. Nevertheless, it’s quite the battle.

The government is largely silent. They are nervous. They do not like all the pressure. They need much, much support and prayer in order to hold firm. We don’t like to think of them caving. But we should not assume it cannot happen.

I ask for continuing prayer for Premier David Alward. And just as I called for prayer about the pro-abortion rally at the Legislature – which was less successful than anticipated – I am calling for prayer (spiritual battle) concerning Ms. Saporta. She and her cohort are out to get New Brunswick. May they fail. May the abortuary indeed close. May our province hold firm for life. May the blood of innocents be spared. May God’s purposes be realized.

Thanks to everyone for everything you do for life and for the care I know you have for our precarious situation here now.